DRT Jaipur disposed of an application (SA/893/2025) where the respondent bank sought liberty to amend its Section 14 application by filing an affidavit regarding receipt of Section 13(3A) objections, held unnecessary to file a fresh application, and disposed of pending IAs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court of the Presiding Officer Debts Recovery Tribunal, Jaipur
Item No. 37
Case No.SA/893/2025
MOHAMMAD SHOKAT Vs AU SMALL FINANCE BANK LIMITED
Date: 25.03.2026. Proceedings through hybrid mode Present:
None for the Applicant
Ms. Surbhi Bairathi, Counsel for the Respondent Bank/FI
In this matter, counsel for the respondent submits that inadvertently in Section 14 application, the fact of receipt of section 13 (3A) objections and its reply was not mentioned.
The case should have been different if Section 13(3A), reply was not given.
Counsel is seeking liberty to file fresh Section 14 application. This Tribunal feels that there is no requirement of filing of fresh Section 14 application and by way of an affidavit they can place the fact of receipt of section 13 (3A) objections and its reply along with the documents before District Magistrate and obtain appropriate orders.
None appears for applicant today.
Accordingly, SA stands disposed of, all pending IAs also stands disposed off, if any.
File be consigned to record as per rules. Copy of order be uploaded on website.
(Vimal Gupta) Presiding Officer Debts Recovery Tribunal, Jaipur
cm
MOHAMMAD SHOKAT
AU SMALL FINANCE BANK LIMITED
Vimal Gupta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
